Slideshow: Competitors Gear Up For DARPA Robot Challenge

The stage has been set for competitors to vie for a $2 million prize from the Department of Defense to develop a robot that could perform a number of physical tasks that might be required to respond to a disaster or an emergency as part of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency's Robotics Challenge, which DARPA unveiled last October.

Research teams from Carnegie Mellon University (CMU), Drexel University, Boston Dynamics, NASA, SCHAFT Inc., Virginia Tech, and Raytheon are developing robots that might be used one day for perilous tasks, such as searching for earthquake survivors or driving a vehicle through rubble.

Click on the image below to see a slideshow of the competing robots.

Atlas, a humanoid robot from Boston Dynamics based on its Atlas robot platform, has seven degrees of freedom in each arm, six degrees of freedom in each leg, and a sensor head with stereo vision and laser radar. It is being designed specifically for meeting the demands of the challenge.(Source: Boston Dynamics)

There is a growing trend in robotics toward using machines to perform tasks that would put humans in harm's way, as the military does for diffusing bombs. This thinking is extending into disaster and recovery efforts. Last year, robots developed by the
Chiba Institute of Technology's Future Robotics Technology Center and Toshiba were deployed to explore areas of the Fukushima nuclear power plant in Japan.

"The technology has advanced to the point where these types of robots are now possible," Tony Stentz, director of CMU's National Robotics Engineering Center and leader of the Tartan Rescue Team building its CHIMP entry, told us. "It is important to develop these robots for use in places where safety is a concern."

The DARPA Robotics Challenge is providing funding for many of its participants to foster robotic innovation that can be used in disaster scenarios.

Most of the physical designs in the competition are more or less humanoid except for two -- NASA's Robosimian, which is modeled after a simian but rather resembles a four-limbed vacuum cleaner; and SCHAFT (by the company of the same name), which stands on two legs like a human but has disproportionately long mechanical arms.

Physical design aside, teams must keep in mind that the robots will have to perform in environments designed for humans, so their perceptions and movements should be as human as possible. Stentz said the CMU team aimed to equip its robot with a key human trait: balance.

We wanted to design a robot that would be able to operate in environments engineered for humans, but without requiring the complex control needed to balance and walk. CHIMP will be able to drive over challenging terrain using all four tracks, and maneuver using two tracks to operate tools. It will use hooks to climb a ladder and will stabilize itself by grabbing with all four limbs. CHIMP will be able to do all of these tasks without running a serious risk of tipping over or tripping and falling.

I suppose in looking at the report again, Ann, I misspoke in my comment. But it's interesting to see the struggles Japan had using these type of robots and hopefully this can inform future design and development. The DARPA work certainly should go a long way to improving the technology as well.

Thanks for the report and information on the Japanese disaster. Very interesting use for robotics technology, and it's easy to see how the extremely high levels of radiation would create an unanticipated technical challenge for these systems.

Thanks for clarifying, Elizabeth. Yes, Japan was caught short after Fukushima, in the sense of not having the appropriate robotics technology for search and rescue, since they hadn't been developing robots in that app area. That's why they had to look outside the country, getting help from iRobot and QinetiQ. But now they're developing their own robots for Fukushima, which I covered here: http://www.designnews.com/author.asp?section_id=1386&doc_id=255699 http://www.designnews.com/document.asp?doc_id=253921 But I don't think it's accurate to say that the robot technology is not working as expected. Japan didn't have the appropriate technology available during the crisis, and the American robots they imported were not designed to handle such insanely high levels of radiation.

Thanks for the recommendation, Nadine. I will check that out sometime. I am not sure how I feel about having very human-like robots. I guess it would depend. I haven't been around any robots live and in person really, so it is hard to say. But Ann, another one of our bloggers, was around Baxter, Rethink Robotics' robot that sort of combines both human and machine features, and I think she actually found "him" quite comfortable to be around. It also, of course, depends on the person.

I can see what you mean, Elizabeth. Many need a "human" connection depending on how the robot is used.

If you're interested in sci-fi anime, Ghost in the Shell 2 depicts the perils of creating very humanlike robots. I gues a lot of sci-fi does. What I like about this movie is that it addresses many of the roles we will expect robots to play as the technology progresses. And, it explores how human and "human" nature clash.

I am not sure I agree with you NadieJ, but I can see why you would say that you prefer robots that are more clearly machines than human. I think humanoid robots may seem a bit strange, but in some cases I think people may be more comfortable working with them. Then again, it might be creepy to get TOO comfortable and think you're dealing with a human. I guess as they become more commonplace, these problems will get solved.

Hi, Ann, here's the link to the report I read about what has been going on at Fukushima: http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2013/03/20/robots-have-failed-fukushima-daiichi-and-japan/

It is more about Japan not having access to the robotic technology it needed when it should have, which I guess speaks to the urgency of developing this type of technology and the relevance of the DARPA contest.

Indeed, for me the DRC is a teaching moment for roboticists, first responders and policy makers (especially on the roles robots can serve in collaborative tasks, for innovating technologies, and fueling the future economy).

If there is material I can provide, please don't hesitate asking. I have a slide presentation (with vocals) on http://www.drc-hubo.com called "The What, Why, When, Where, and How of the DRC".

Actually, I was implying that the eyes make it more creepy, Nadine. I'm wondering if they are leaving out the eyes to reduce the creepiness factor. Eyes might make it too human, which creeps people out.

Focus on Fundamentals consists of 45-minute on-line classes that cover a host of technologies. You learn without leaving the comfort of your desk. All classes are taught by subject-matter experts and all are archived. So if you can't attend live, attend at your convenience.